Re: metadata plugins (was Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion)

Łukasz Mierzwa
2006-08-02T19:08:04Z

Dnia Wed, 02 Aug 2006 20:45:07 +0200, Horst H. von Brand
<vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl> napisał:

> Vladimir V. Saveliev <vs@namesys.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 17:32 +0200, Å�ukasz Mierzwa wrote:
>> > Dnia Fri, 28 Jul 2006 18:33:56 +0200, Linus Torvalds
>> <torvalds@osdl.org>
>> > napisaÅ‚:
>> > > In other words, if a filesystem wants to do something fancy, it
>> needs to
>> > > do so WITH THE VFS LAYER, not as some plugin architecture of its
>> own. We
>> > > already have exactly the plugin interface we need, and it literally
>> _is_
>> > > the VFS interfaces - you can plug in your own filesystems with
>> > > "register_filesystem()", which in turn indirectly allows you to
>> plug in
>> > > your per-file and per-directory operations for things like lookup
>> etc.
>
>> > What fancy (beside cryptocompress) does reiser4 do now?
>>
>> it is supposed to provide an ability to easy modify filesystem behaviour
>> in various aspects without breaking compatibility.
>
> If it just modifies /behaviour/ it can't really do much. And what can be
> done here is more the job of the scheduler, not of the filesystem. Keep
> your
> hands off it!

You modify the way the fs stores files or let You access them, since when
it is a job for a scheduler?

> If it somehow modifies /on disk format/, it (by *definition*) isn't
> compatible. Ditto.
>
>> > Can someone point me to a list of things that are required by kernel
>> > mainteiners to merge reiser4 into vanilla?
>>
>> list of features reiser4 does not have now:
>> O_DIRECT support - we are working on it now
>> various block size support
>
> Is this required?
>
>> quota support
>> xattrs and acls
>
> Without those, it is next to useless anyway.

I don't use any of this and I live quite happly.